From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38482) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgXix-0006f7-Jl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 05:58:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgXir-0007Jj-Kv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 05:58:47 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4122) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UgXir-0007JV-Cq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 26 May 2013 05:58:41 -0400 Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 12:58:25 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Message-ID: <20130526095825.GR4725@redhat.com> References: <51A10BCA.6000800@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Potential to accelerate QEMU for specific architectures List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Lior Vernia , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= , =?utf-8?B?6Zmz6Z+L5Lu7?= , Richard Henderson On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 10:26:04AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 26 May 2013 06:40, Lior Vernia wrote: > > Sorry, right after I wrote the message it occured to me I should have > > mentioned that I was talking about qemu-system, either x86 or i386. At > > the moment I just ran the limbo app on a Galaxy SIII with various > > images, just to see the capabilities, and was disappointed. Limbo > > seems to run v1.1.0. > > > I wanted to add that I've been reading about this Russian startup > > that's looking to emulate x86 on ARM at 40% of native speed using > > dynamic binary translation (as far as I gather): > > http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/10/04/x86-on-arm/1 > > So this should be possible. And it can't be very much unlike QEMU, can it? > > That article suggests they're doing application-level translation, > not system-level emulation. If you: > * design your emulation from scratch with that use case in mind > (qemu is system emulation first with app-level as a secondary case) > * are happy to have just one guest and one target architecture > (this is actually mostly useful in that it reduces the set of things > you have to test; it also lets you take shortcuts in corner cases > for your initial implementation) > * put more concentrated effort into emulation performance than QEMU > > then you should be able to do better than qemu does currently. > You'd probably end up with something like Transitive's QuickTransit/ > Rosetta. > Actually here is an example of Starcraft running in android on ARM in full speed: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=39009939 Search more about winulator. -- Gleb.